I also find this bit very hard to believe :
"...... in accordance of the best interests of the athletes involved......."
How can being denied big event experience be in the best interests of any up and coming athlete ?
JWOC/EYOC selections
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
curro ergo sum
-
King Penguin - addict
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 6:56 pm
- Location: Kendal
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Snail
...so why select athletes that did not compete in all the selection races? I have no doubt some of the selections are correct and some of the athletes tick the "potential" box but it's still all abit smoke and mirrors.I think this is effectively what the selectors have done - they consider only the selected athletes have demonstrated the qualifying
- PhilJ
- green
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:59 am
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Seems strange that one of the expected athletes who was not selected was nearly 20 minutes quicker over the same course as one of the selected athletes! There does not seem to be consistency.
- Tatty
- guru
- Posts: 1626
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:21 pm
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
As a principle this can't be right. Even if someone were say consistently 2nd best in the UK, but equally consistently 15% down on the best, over a significant period, then they are going to be nowhere in JWOC/WOC. Should they be selected?
yes...whatever happened to its not the winning but taking part??
Also if thats too romantic....experience of top pressured competitions is a great motivator and people can improve, esp youngsters (havn't improved for years myself )
- johnrobinson
- green
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:09 pm
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
whatever happened to its not the winning but taking part??
Because the Selection Policy "aims to support the development of athletes who show the ability or potential to produce top ten results at the World Orienteering Championships in the current season or in future seasons."
You can argue that the selection policy should be different... but given the policy it isn't obvious to me that the selectors have made any glaring errors.
- Snail
- diehard
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:37 pm
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
PhilJ wrote:So to head off the immediate backlash the talent manager puts the waffle about selection criteria etc, fair enough.
I think that was the most telling part of the whole selection statement - perhaps one of the most defensive and negative selection statements I've ever read. It also conrtains some of the most ludicrous statements I've ever read in such a statement. 140 athletes' percentages behind the winner were calculated - so what? If you need to do that, you don't know your job. In the athletes' best interests? Really? That is complete b*llsh*t, and insufferably patronising. It all smacks of someone desperately trying to justify a what they know is a weak position by hiding behind the 'we know best' standard.
Either way the fault lay with the talent manager and not the juniors.
Even I, at some distance from all of this, have heard this rather more often from rather too many sources, from too many who I respect, than is good - not just mutterings too.
They're the ones we don't want to find something else to do.Time for our talented juniors to take up another sport and ditch O as a pastime.
Last edited by awk on Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:14 pm, edited 3 times in total.
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
i didn't say there were errors, just making the point that if you have 6 places seems odd to use only 3.
as to your point, how far into the future are the selectors projecting...there are cases of people coming through in twenties who were just good in teens and conversely some fade away. Physical development rates alone can make a big difference in teens but gets ironed out eventually. really saying best to keep as many irons in the fire as possible.
as to your point, how far into the future are the selectors projecting...there are cases of people coming through in twenties who were just good in teens and conversely some fade away. Physical development rates alone can make a big difference in teens but gets ironed out eventually. really saying best to keep as many irons in the fire as possible.
- johnrobinson
- green
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:09 pm
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Part of the waffle
Not sure how competing in eyoc constitutes the potential to win a medal at woc in Italy in July? Or is it me?
What I also can't fathom is the selection was based on % behind the winners time etc?? So Megan won jk w18e overall day 2 and 3 combined and the sprint day 1, so her overall % was 0 behind the winner as she won everything, yet all she gets is eyoc which she went to last year! If anyone deserved a bump up to jwoc it is her, what else has the girl girl got to do to get selected, beat everyone hands down at the 3 selection races and still not get selected...ffs
In particular, the Policy aims to support the development of athletes who show the ability or potential to produce top ten results at the World Orienteering Championships in the current season or in future seasons.
Not sure how competing in eyoc constitutes the potential to win a medal at woc in Italy in July? Or is it me?
What I also can't fathom is the selection was based on % behind the winners time etc?? So Megan won jk w18e overall day 2 and 3 combined and the sprint day 1, so her overall % was 0 behind the winner as she won everything, yet all she gets is eyoc which she went to last year! If anyone deserved a bump up to jwoc it is her, what else has the girl girl got to do to get selected, beat everyone hands down at the 3 selection races and still not get selected...ffs
- PhilJ
- green
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:59 am
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Get DQ'd or DNF that seems to help !
- Vidalos
- white
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 12:37 pm
- Location: Out there
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
PhilJ wrote:...won jk w18e overall day 2 and 3 combined and the sprint day 1, so her overall % was 0 behind the winner as she won everything...
Not true. Winning Day 2 and 3 combined is not the same as winning Day 2, which was a selection race, and Day 3, which was a selection race. It is perfectly possible to win overall whilst not winning each day, and so have a percentage behind the winner >0%. Also, percentages are done on fastest junior runner (Lucy on Day 2 and Day 3 for the girls), as JWOC is a M/W20 competition.
- parallelerror
- string
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:42 pm
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Time for our talented juniors to take up another sport and ditch O as a pastime.
No. Time for the membership to ask BOF to find a new Talent Manager.
- SJC
- diehard
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:45 am
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Or all the juniors "resign" from the talent squad, then the role becomes redundant.
New talent mgr...been here before, posting August 8th 2013...
http://forum.nopesport.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13959
New talent mgr...been here before, posting August 8th 2013...
http://forum.nopesport.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13959
- PhilJ
- green
- Posts: 392
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 11:59 am
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
SJC wrote:Time for our talented juniors to take up another sport and ditch O as a pastime.
No. Time for the membership to ask BOF to find a new Talent Manager.
Its not the talent manager who makes the selection decisions.
http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/i ... bsite3.pdf
- speedy123
- off string
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:30 pm
- Location: Cumbria
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
Some great cherry-picking of the selection criteria there... in full:
So clearly JWOC isn't about balancing a squad for future development...
And how important is the % behind winner aspect? The selection criteria suggest <10% for selection to the development squad for juniors. Only the winner and one other was within that for the long races for the girls, none within 10% of Aidan for the guys. So that's that out of the window. What was the 'figure' used, if any, for selections? I don't know, and the calculations for the selected team don't make it obvious either:
Men (Sprint, Middle, Long) % behind:
(assuming comparison against the best GBR runner)
1.9, 3.9, 0.0
3.2, 7.7, 10.5
0.0, 7.5, 19.8
9.7, 14.6, 20.5
0.3, 24.3, 21.2
0.2, 4.3, mp
Women % behind:
10.3, 0.0, 0.0
0.0, 4.4, 3.7
6.2, 8.1, 49.2
and the best/most consistent of the rest of the W18/W20 field:
3.3, 25.0, 12.3
5.5, 14.4, 28.0
7.4, 10.4, 17.7
9.4, 1.8, 38.1
So I'm guessing this % behind aspect of selection can't be all that important, given the figures... or there is a completely different set of standards being applied to M & W. Notwithstanding that comparison against an arbitrarily moving standard is ever a good measure. What would the selectors do if they had someone so far ahead of the field that no-one got within a certain %?
[Edited to correct the terrible maths...]
The ‘balance’ of selection to a squad or competition is integral to the vision for the programme and will include consideration of the mix of athletes selected to achieve success at the competition as compared to the number of athletes selected to be developed for future success. The NTP Manager will determine the ‘balance’ of selection for a competition or camp and will communicate this to the Selector as appropriate.
Selections will be taken to accommodate the balance determined using the following sequence:
a) Athletes who have demonstrated the ability to achieve a top 10 place in World Orienteering Championship in the current or previous year
b) Athletes with the potential to achieve a top 10 place at WOC in the next 2 to 5 years
c) Athletes who have demonstrated a high level of performance at the level of competition being selected for
d) Athletes who have demonstrated a high level of performance just below the level of competition being selected for and who can justifiably be expected to either perform well or improve their performance by competing in the event
e) Athletes who, in exceptional circumstances, may be required to create a balanced team of athletes to attend a competition
So clearly JWOC isn't about balancing a squad for future development...
And how important is the % behind winner aspect? The selection criteria suggest <10% for selection to the development squad for juniors. Only the winner and one other was within that for the long races for the girls, none within 10% of Aidan for the guys. So that's that out of the window. What was the 'figure' used, if any, for selections? I don't know, and the calculations for the selected team don't make it obvious either:
Men (Sprint, Middle, Long) % behind:
(assuming comparison against the best GBR runner)
1.9, 3.9, 0.0
3.2, 7.7, 10.5
0.0, 7.5, 19.8
9.7, 14.6, 20.5
0.3, 24.3, 21.2
0.2, 4.3, mp
Women % behind:
10.3, 0.0, 0.0
0.0, 4.4, 3.7
6.2, 8.1, 49.2
and the best/most consistent of the rest of the W18/W20 field:
3.3, 25.0, 12.3
5.5, 14.4, 28.0
7.4, 10.4, 17.7
9.4, 1.8, 38.1
So I'm guessing this % behind aspect of selection can't be all that important, given the figures... or there is a completely different set of standards being applied to M & W. Notwithstanding that comparison against an arbitrarily moving standard is ever a good measure. What would the selectors do if they had someone so far ahead of the field that no-one got within a certain %?
[Edited to correct the terrible maths...]
Last edited by distracted on Tue Apr 29, 2014 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
distracted - addict
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2004 12:15 am
Re: JWOC/EYOC selections
I can sometimes see why a full quota of athletes aren't taken to WOC - tough love, the old 7-per-gender rule.
Not taking a full quota of juniors is criminal. How do you think it makes kids in 14/16/18 looking towards JWOC selection over the next 2-6 years?
Want to see a talent pathway? I'll show you my talent pathway...
Not taking a full quota of juniors is criminal. How do you think it makes kids in 14/16/18 looking towards JWOC selection over the next 2-6 years?
Want to see a talent pathway? I'll show you my talent pathway...
M21-Lairy
- ba-ba
- diehard
- Posts: 668
- Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: somewhere in the between
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 188 guests